Author 




Title 



Imprint 



16 — 47372-a GPO 



\y 



PROCEEDINGS 



OF 



Tiie SOGieiy ol Ealnila Piogiieis 



In H^fsi^ence to the Histories 



OF 



HUBERT HOWE BANCROFT 




Oi\X. 



San FRANCISCO: 

STERBTT PRINTING COMPANY 

FEBRUARr, 1894 






MISREPRESENTATIONS 



OF 



EARLY CfllilFORfllfi HISTORY 

COieiEeiHlCTEnD 



Proceedings of The Society of California Pioneers in 

regard to certain misrepresentations of men and 

events in early California history made 

in the works of 

HUBERT HOWE BANCROFT 

AND COMMONLY KNOWN AS 
BANCROKTT'S HISTTORIKS 



HALL OF 

THE SOCIETY OF CflLipORNIfl PlOflEERS 

SAN KRA.NCISCO 
FEBRUARY, 1894 



f^j^> 






INXROOUCXION. 



The Society of California Pioneers is composed of men who 
came to California prior to the first day of January, 1850, and 
their male descendants. 

The proceedings hereinafter recited have been taken there- 
fore, after due and careful deliberation, by men, who are 
personally familiar with the true facts of early California his- 
tory, and who have bsen actuated by a sense of duty to them- 
selves and to posterity in correcting certain gross misrepresen- 
tations in regard to the men and events of that early period. 

These misrepresentations have appeared from time to time 
in the books commonly known as " Bancroft's Histories," and 
have heretofore passed unchallenged and found common public 
acceptance as authority for reviewers, and others who have 
written upon the subject. 

The time has at last arrived when, in the judgment of the 
now old men who yet compose the majority of members of this 
Society, the gross mis-statements in regard to men and events 
which these books contain should be refuted, by the publica- 
tion of the testimony of living witnesses, so that that testimony 
may go upon record and be perpetuated, and the real facts and 
truth of history be vindicated. 

In all its proceedings upon this question this Society has 
vainly sought to find a just motive on the part of the so-called 
"Historian " Bancroft for the astonishing mis-statements 
which he has given in his works. No excuse, no circumstance 
of palliation has so far been offered by him in the matter. 

This Society can do no more, therefore, than to refer the 
whole subject to the deliberative judgment of a discriminating 
public, in the belief that the common verdict of that public as 
well as that of posterity will be that such so-called " history " 
as that herein considered will forever be held to be unworthy 
of credence, and will deserve and find no place in the public 
or private libraries of the world. 




HAIvIv OF 



ocieiij 



tij of ^alifopnia | 



'loneens 



SArJ FRANCISCO, NOVEMBER 1893. 



la the matter of the Society of California* 
Pioneers, 

YS. 

Hubert Howe Bancroft, an Honorary Mem- 
ber of said Society. 

On the second day of October, 1893, at a regular monthly 
meeting of the Society of California Pioneers, a resolution 
was introduced by Dr. Washington Ayer, of which the follow- 
ing is a copy, viz. : 

" Whereas, statements have been made by an honorary mem- 
ber of this Society in a quasi-history published by one Hubert 
Howe Bancroft, which are at variance with historical records, 
and reflect upon the honor, dignity and integrity of the 
California Pioneers, and 

" Whereas, All such statements have no foundation of truth, 
and are unworthy the labors of an upright historian, and only 
becoming to one, who in our judgment strayed far from the 



domain of an honest writer, with the purpose in view to mislead 
the reader and wrong the founders of a new State upon the 
extreme western boundary of our country, and by such state- 
ments did wantonly and maliciously wrong the old Argonauts; 
therefore, 

" Resolved, That the name of Hubert Howe Bancroft be stric- 
ken from the list of Honorary Members of this Society, and 
that the Secretary be requested to send him a copy of this 
preamble and resolution." 

After some debate the foregoing resolation was adopted and 
Dr. Wm. S. Simpson gave notice that at the next regular 
monthly meeting of the Society he would move for a recon- 
sideration of the vote upon the adoption of such resolution. 

At the regular monthly meeting of the Society, held on the 
6th day of November, 1893, Dr. Simpson, in accordance with 
the notice so given, moved that the vote upon the before 
recited resolution be reconsidered, which motion, after debate, 
was adopted. 

The resolution was then referred to a special committee 
consisting of Dr. Wm. S. Simpson, A. S. Hall, R. Thompson 
and S. W. Holladay, with instructions to notify Mr. Bancroft 
of the action that has been taken by the Society, and to 
request him to appear before such committee — if he desired to 
do so — and show cause why his name should not be struck 
from the roll of Honorary Membership, as proposed in the 
resolution under consideration. 

Herewith are presented the specific charges against Hubert 
Howe Bancroft, alluded to in the before recited resolution, and 
which constitute the reasons why it is sought to strike the 
name of said Bancroft from the roll of Honorary Membership 
of said Society. 



First. — Because of the facts stated in the following preamble 
and resolutions, iutroduced at the regular monthly meeting of 
the Society of California Pioneers, on the 7th day of August, 
1893, by W. B. Farwell and unanimously adopted at the next 
regular monthly meeting of the Society, held on the 4th day of 
September, 1893. 

** Wheeeas, In the organization and founding of the Society 
of California Pioneers, one of its declared and most important 
purposes was set forth in its constitution as follows, viz. : ' To 
collect and preserve information connected with the early 
settlement and subsequent history of the country, and also, in 
all appropriate matters to advance the interests and perpetuate 
the memory of those whose sagacity, energy and enterprise 
induced them to settle in the wilderness and become the 
founders of a new State, ' and 

"Whereas, In pursuance of these declared purposes, we, who 
are yet living witnesses of the more prominent events of early 
California history, and who were contemporaries of the men 
whose names are most prominent as actors and participants in 
these events, deem it our duty not only to ' collect and pre- 
serve information in regard to the acqusition and settlement of 
California,' but also to correct misstatements and misrepresen- 
tations of so-called historians who have written upon the sub- 
ject, whenever and wherever they may be found, and 

" Whereas, Hubert Howe Bancroft, in his so-called ' History 
of California, ' has, within the personal knowledge and recol- 
lection of many of the old Pioneers here present, distorted the 

facts and truths of such history, and maligned the memory of 
many of the men most conspicuous as participants in these 
early events, more of which misrepresentations as illustrative 
of the purposes of these resolutions are summarized as follows, 
viz: 



*' First. Fremont is designated a ' filibuster,' whose almost 
every act in California was a wrong from beginning to end. 
He says (See Vol. 3 of his ' History of California,' pages 747 
and 749) : ' When the authorities very properly ordered him to 
leave California, he fortified a position on Gavilan Peak and 
raised the U. S. flag. This was foolish bravado, as he realized 
after a day or two of reflection in connection with Consul 
Larkin's advice and the sight of military preparations at San 
Juan, so he ran away in the night. ' 

** And again, speaking of the Bear Flag revolt, he says, 
* That most indefensible rising of the settlers which interrupted 
negotiations for a pacific change of flag, would not have 
occurred but for Fremont's promise of active support when 
needed; therefore, he must be held responsible not only for 
the bloodshed aud bitterness of feeling that attended the con- 
flict of 1846-7, but for the much more disastrous state of afi'airs 
which but for sheer good luck must have resulted.' 

"And again: 'At Monterey though Commodore Sloat would 
not adopt his views, Fremont found in Stockton a filibuster 
after his own heart, willing to incorporate the Gavilan episode 
and the Bear Flag revolt in the sacred cause of the United 
States.' 

*' And again, speaking of the controversy which subsequent- 
ly arose between Stockton and Kearney, in which Fremont 
was loyal to Stockton as he was in duty bound to be, Bancroft 
sneeringly remarks : 'Though technically disobeying military 
orders, Fremont could not with the honor that should prevail 
among filibusters as well as thieves, abandon his chief,' etc. 
And he closes his biographical sketch in these words: ' Fre- 
mont did more than any other to prevent or retard the conquest 
of California. He is to be regarded as an adventurer of mar- 
velous good fortune, for a man of moderate abilities to be 
made conspicuous before the world or to enjoy opportunities 
that cannot be utilized. ' 



8 

"These are but a few of the many false and malicious state- 
ments made by Bancroft in regard to Fremont, and which we 
tave thus specifically quoted with proper reference to the 
volume and pages where they may be found. Through his 
history Fremont is constantly misrepresented, and the part 
that he played in the acquisition of California is constantly 
belittled and distorted to suit a seemingly vengeful malice 
existing in the mind of the historian, the cause of which it is 
not our purpose or duty to inquire into. 

*' Second. Of Commodore Stockton he says (See page 735, 
Tol. 5 of his 'History of California,'): 'His whole policy of 
conquest which was to produce such unhappy results, his 
blustering tirade against imaginary evils, his willingness to 
identify a criminal revolt of vagabond settlers,' (referring to 
the men of the Bear Flag party, with a legitimate military 
occupation, etc.,) 'his whole reputation as conqueror of Cali- 
fornia, is as unmerited as that of the Pathfinder.' 

"Third. 'The acts of the Bear Flag party,' as above 
referred to, in which during its operations, such men as John 
Bidwell, Samuel J. Henley, Pearson B. Bedding, Robert 
Semple, and other equally well-known early Californians were 
participants, 'were,' sajs he, ' a criminal revolt of vagabond 
settlers." And he designates the man who was placed first in 
command of the Bear Flag party, Ezekiel Merritt, whom 
Fremont says was ' a rugged man, fearless and simple, taking 
delight in incurring risks, but tractable, and not given to 
asking questions when there was something he was required to 
do,' as a 'coarse-grained, 1 )ud-mouthed, whisky-drinking, 
quarrelsome fellow, well adapted to the use that was made of 
him in promoting the filibuster schemes.' (See page 736 of 
Vol. 4 of Bancroft's History of California.) 

"Fourth. More criminally wicked and more cruel than all, 
is liis denunciation of that gentle and generous-hearted man. 



the late General John A. Sutter, (see Vol. 5, pages 738 to 740^ 
for what follows), and after stating that he had obtained from 
him personally at his home in Latiz, Penn., * the story of hi& 
wrongs, ' and which was without doubt truthfully told, he turns 
upon him with wolf-like ferocity and reads him thus : ' He was 
a German-Swiss trader, compelled by 'bankruptcy to become 
an adventurer in America. None of the pioneers have received 
so much praise from so many sources, few have deserved so 
little. He was but an adventurer from the first, entitled to no 
admiration or sympathy. His career in New Mexico was at 
the best discreditable. He came to California in the false 
character of a captain in the French Army. Of principle or 
honor, of respect for the rights of others, we find but slight 
trace in him. There was no side of any controversy he would 
not adopt at the call of interest. Nationality, religion, friend- 
ship, obligation, consistency counted for little or nothing. 
There were no classes of his associates, hardly an individual, 
with whom he did not quarrel or whom in his anger he did not 
roundly abuse. His only capital was money borrowed on the 
way to California, or property obtained on credit from Cali- 
fornians and Eussians after his arrival, all on pretenses more 
or less false. He never hesitated to assume any obligation 
for the future, without regard to his ability to meet it. He 
rarely if ever paid a debt when due.' 

** Sutter's Fort he designates as * an isolated rendezvous for 
the hostile and uncontrollable elements of a vagabond popula- 
tion in the far interior ' — referring here, of course, mainly to the 
American settlers in the Sacramento Valley. And again: 
* Though Sutter's establishment did something to promote the 
influx of American settlers, it was in no sense beneficial to the 
interests of the United States, merely fomenting filibusterism 
with all its unhappy results. ' 

" That Sutter treated immigrants. ' more kindly than a dozen 
ethers,' and that he did so ' at a personal sacrifice,' is not true. 



10 

Neither is it true ' that Sutter in 1845-6 was friendly to the 
United States, or to the immigrants as Americans. ' And 

" "Whereas, Without quoting further from this monstrous 
series of libels upon the memories of departed illustrious 
Pioneers and monstrous perversion of the facts of history, it is 
hereby 

" Resolved, That Bancroft's denunciation of Fremont, Stock- 
ton and Sutter, and his designation of the men of the Bear 
Flag party as vagabond settlers, are plainly the vaporings of a 
mind distorted by prejudice, or envenomed by malice, and 
attach a greater degree of disgrace to their author than to the 
honored names and memories of the men whom he thus 
maliciously maligns. 

''Resolved, That upon the principle of 'false in one thing, 
false in all,' Bancroft's 'History of California,' so-called, is, in 
the opinion of this Society, unworthy of credence as authority, 
or as a source of correct information for present or future 
generations, and merits the just condemnation of every fair- 
minded man, whose early personal experiences enable him to 
form a true estimate of its value. " 

Second. — Because of the malicious misrepresentations of the 
characters of some of the men who were among the earlier 
pioneers of California, and who were also among the founders, 
and respected members of this Society up to the day of their 
death; as instance the following: 

Of Andrew J. Grayson — a man renowned in the scientij&c 
world as an ornithologist, whose contributions to that branch 
of scientific knowledge are commonly acknowledged as hardly 
inferior in value and interest to those of Audubon. This man, 
Mr. Bancroft in his "Pioneer Index and Register" (Vol. 3, 
page 764) alludes to (after saying that "he was active in 
raising men for the California Batallion, in which he ranked 



11 

as lieutenant,") as " a gambler and an associate of Lippiucott^ 
McDougal and other like characters," which statement, in so 
far as it accuses Grayson of being a gambler, is wickedly and 
cruelly false, and ktaown to be so by many pioneers now living, 
who were honored by being counted among his personal friends. 

Of Benjamin S. Lippincott, alluded to in his remarks upon 
Grayson, (see Vol. 4, " Histoiy of California," page 714,) he 
says: "He was a gambler by profession and one of the boys;" 
another equally false and malicious mis-statement, and known 
to be so by many pioneers still living, who can testify to that 
fact. Even Bancroft himself, with strange inconsistency, in 
the same notice of Lippincott, says: " He wag active in raising 
rjecruits for the war, and served as Lieutenant of Company H., 
California Batallion, also acting as quarter-master." He says 
also: " He was owner of town lots, a candidate for the council, 
a Member of the Constitutional Convention of '49, representing 
San Joaquin county in the first Legislature, and Calaveras in 
'55 and '61." 

Of George McDougal, also alluded to in his notice of Gray- 
son, he says (See Vol. 4, page 723j : " He lived at Santa Cruz 
and Gilroy; served as a kind of unattached volunteer in the 
California Batallion in '46 and '47; was a broker, that is a 
gambler, at San Francisco in '47 and '48, becoming the owner 
of many town lots in partnership with Lippincott," etc. 

These men, as has been said, were among the early pioneers 
of California, and were also among the founders of this 
Society. Clearly, after the misrepresentations and abuse 
heaped upon the memories of Fremont, Stockton, Sutter, the 
men of the Bear Flag party, and all who were active in bring- 
ing about the acquisition of California as an American posses- 
sion, it is not difficult to find the motive for this gross 
aspersion upon their memories, when we consider that each 



12 

one of them was an active participant in that patriotic work 
which was so distasteful to Mr. Bancroft. 

Third. — Because of willful and malignant misrepresenta- 
tions of various other Americans, who were among the early 
settlers in California, of the part which they played in the 
events that preceded, and transpired during the conquest of 
the country", as instanced in the following statement of facts : 

In 1840, a hundred or more American and other foreign 
residents were arrested by the Mexican authorities, taken to 
Monterey under the accusation of having plotted against the 
government. Among them were such men as Dr. Marsh, who 
lived upon the San Joaquin river; Livermore, from whom 
Livermore's pass and valley were named, and others of like 
prominence. They were imprisoned, maltreated, subjected to 
great hardships and suffering, and some fifty or more were 
finally expatriated and sent to Mexico, but were subsequently 
released and sent back by the Mexican authorities, with a 
money indemnity for the wrong which had been put upon them. 

T. J. Farnham, an American, who chanced to be at Mon- 
terey while these men were imprisoned there, in his book 
entitled "Life, Adventures and Travels in California," (pub- 
lished in 1852) gives a thrilling account of the matter, in which 
he says (see page 59): "Mr. Larkin made arrangements with 
the government to day to furnish the prisoners with food and 
drink. Their cells were examined and found destitute of 
fioors. The ground was so wet that the poor fellows sunk into 
it several inches at every step. On this they stood, sat and 
slept. From fifty to sixty were crowded into a room eighteen 
to twenty feet square. They could not all sit at once, even in 
that vile pool, still less lie down. The cells were so low and 
tight that the only way of getting air enough to sustain life 
was to divide themselves into platoons, each of which, in turn, 
stood at the grate awhile to breathe. Most of them had been 
in prison seven or eight days, with no food except a trifling 



13 

quantity, clandestinely introduced'by a few daring countrymen 
outside. When I arrived at the prison, some of them were 
frantic, others in a stupor of exhaustion and appeared to be 
dying." 

Farnham then goes on and gives a detailed narrative of the 
events which preceded this cruelty, and as afterwards sa 
clearly shown to the Mexican authorities that they disavowed 
and disapproved it. He gives the names of the prisoners, 
among whom, in addition to those already named, were those 
of Nathaniel Spear, Peter Storm, afterwards a prominent Bear 
Flag man : Mark West and other well known men of that time, 
and he says (page 70): "Forty-one of the prisoners, whose 
names appear on the concluding pages of the last chapter, 
furnished me with written accounts of their arrest and subse- 
quent treatment." Some of which statements he gives in full, 
and which simply corroborate all that he states concerning the 
affair. 

It is proper to state here, that while all this was done during 
the time and under the direction of Alvarado, who was then 
governor, the most brutal treatment of the prisoners and their 
subsequent deportation to Mexico in chains was carried out by 
the same Don Jose Castro, who, as we have already seen, 
ordered Fremont out of the country, and was the leading 
spirit of every movement against Americans prior to the con- 
quest of California. 

Coming now to Mr. Bancroft's treatment of this matter. In 
"Volume 4, of his "History of California," he gives the story 
of the arrest and deportation from beginning to end, breathing 
a spirit of hostility to the prisoners and their historian Farn- 
ham, and an equally zealous endeavor to apologize for and to 
explain away the conduct of the Mexican authorities, and 
Castro in particular. 



14 

Admitting that the statements were made by some of the 
prisoners to Farnham, as given in the latter's book, and quoting 
some of them himself, Bancroft says (Vol. 4, page 15): " The 
victims and their friends have accused the Californians, not 
only of having exiled them without cause, but of cruelty at the 
time of arrest, during their confinement, and on the voyage to 
San Bias. These charges are, I believe, exaggerated, though 
from the nature of the case, they cannot be entirelv disproved. 
In considering the evidence to he ofered, the reader should hear in 
mind the character of the exiles, as men ivhose ivord could not he 
trusted, the opportunity to make their stories agree, their interest 
with a vieiv to indemnity from Mexico in maintaining their 
wrongs and exaggerating them, and the prevailing spirit of every 
thing Mexican, which in the following years served as a favorable 
medium for their complaints.'' 

A statement backed by not one word of evidence to support 
it, and considering the wantoness of calling a body of fifty or 
more men, about all of whom he could by no possibility have 
had adequate knowledge to justify it, as ''men ivhose ivord 
could not he trusted-;' it is sufficient in itself to justify this 
Society in condemning him as an historian, and as unworthy 
of association with them. 

But following out his line of policy as an historical writer, 
and to show how he proceeds to establish his propositions by 
arrogant and unscrupulous dictum, instead of by presentation 
of historical facts, attention is drawn to his statements about 
Farnham, who has already been quoted as the chief narrator 
of this episode in the early history of California. Of him, 
Bancroft says (Vol. 4, page 25): "His remarks on men and 
events at Monterey are so evidently and absurdly false as to 
throw more than a doubt upon all that he says." And again, 
in his biographical notice of him, (Vol. 3, page 734) he says: 
" His work on California is criticised elsewhere in this work; 
here it must suffice to say, that in all those parts resting on 



15 

his own observation, it is worthless trash, and in all that 
relates to the California people, a tissue of falsehood." And 
yet, nowhere does he attempt to impeach his statements except 
by this sweeping dictum of his own imperious will, and his 
apologetic efforts to present the case in the strongest possible 
pro -Mexican and anti-American spirit. 

Illustrative ot' this latter proposition, it is well to quote here 
his laudatory praise of Don Jose Castro, who, as has been 
shown, was always the most active, influential and effective 
enemy to Americans in California. Of him, he saj^s (Vol. 2, 
page 752): " With his acts in the contest with the settlers and 
the United States little fault can be found. He did not mal- 
treat the exiles of '40, as charged by Farnham and others. He 
did not break his pledge to Fremont in the spring of '46, nor 
did he do any of the absurd things attribiited to him in con- 
nection with the Gavilan affair; but his conduct was far more 
honorable, dignified and consistent than that of Fremont. He 
did not threatea to drive the immigrants back into the snows 
of the interior, but treated them with uniform kindness 
In the southern negotiations of August, he bore a much more 
honorable part than did Commodore Stockton," and so on ad 
nauseam. 

Of this same Castro, Commodore Stockton, in his proclama- 
tion on taking command in July, 1846, at Monterey, said: 
" The present general of the forces of California is a usurper; 
he has been guilty of great offences; has impoverished and 
drained the country of almost its last dollar, and has deserted 
his post now when most needed. He has deluded and deceived 
the inhabitants of California and they wish his expulsion from 
the country. He came iato power by rebellion and force, and 
by force he must be expelled." 

Whose testimony shall prevail, Bancroft, writing from the 
standpoint of narrow prejudice forty years after the events 



16 

which he is relating, or Stockton, the active, able and patriotic 
contemporary of the man whom he knew so well, and with 
whose every official act he was so thoroughly familiar? 

One more witness remains to be heard on this arrest and 
expatriation of Americans in 1840, which the historian Ban- 
croft has so assiduously endeavored tj explain away and gloss 
over. 

Thomas O. Larkin, in a communication to the Secretary 
of State, of June 15, 1846, written before he had received the 
news of the hoisting of the Bear Flag, and Fremont's active 
operations in the north, said: "The undersigned improves 
the opportanity of observing that there cjinnot be brought for- 
ward by the President against Mexico, an}' claim or demand 
so strong and so impetuous as the unjust and cruel arrest, 
imprisonment and shipment in irons of so many Americans 
from this port in April, 1840. Californians in California com- 
mitted this most outrageous act, and they and their territory 
should be held responsible for the deed." 

Fourth. — Because of the following facts which speak for 
themselves. In his "History of Oregon," volume 2, (first 
edition) page 9f, in relating the story of the trial of certain 
Cayuse Indians for murder before Judge O. C. Pratt, a former 
member of this Society, now deceased, he says: The solemnity 
and quiet of religious services characterized the trial, at which 
between two or three hundred persons were present. Ai its 
close, when the jury had returned a verdict of guilty, there 
was no unseemly approval, only a long drawn sigh of relief 
that the dreadful business was drawing to a close. Attending 
the episode were the usual hypocrisies of society. It was pre- 
determined by the people that these Indians should die. For 
myself, I think they were guilty and ought to have died. But, 
I would not, on that account, as a narrator of facts, indulge in 
divers little fictions to make the affair more pathetic. Nor 



17 

was it at all necessary for thej^spectator to pat the judge on the 
back for being * so firm and fearless. ' There was not the 
slightest danger that Pratt would go against the people in this 
matter. But he ruled as he did, not so much from any just and 
noble sentiments, as, first, because there was present no induce- 
ment for him to do otherwise, the fifty horses not going to the 
judge, and secondly he well knew the country would be too hot to 
hold him should he do otherwise^ 

In the second edition of the same volume of the ' ' History of 
Oregon," at the same page, all this is stricken out, and in its 
place appears the following: " The solemnity of religious ser- 
vices characterized the entire trial, at which between four and 
five hundred persons were present, who watched the proceed- 
ings with intense anxiety. Counsel appointed by the judge 
made vigorous effort to clear their clients. No one unfamiliar 
with the condition of affairs in the territory of Oregon at the 
time of which I am writing, can realize the interest displayed 
by the people of the entire country in this important and never 
to be forgotten trial. The bare thought that the five wretches, 
that had assassinated Dr. Whitman, Mrs. Whitman, Mr. 
Saunders, and a large number of immigrants, might by any 
technicality of the law, be allowed to go unpunished, was 
sufficient to distract every man, woman and child throughout 
the length and breadth of the territorial limits. 

"The judge appreciated in all its seriousness the responsi- 
bility of his position. He seemed to realize that upon his 
decision hung the lives of thousands of the whites inhabiting 
the Willamette Valley. He proved, however, equal to the 
emergency. His knowledge of the law was not only thorough, 
but during his early life, and before having been called to the 
bench in Oregon, he had become familiar with all the ques- 
tions involving territorial boundaries and treaty stipulations. 
His position was dignified, firm and fearless. His charge was 
full, logical and concise. His judicialjaction in this and many 



18 

other trials of a criminal and civil nature in the territory 
during his judgeship, made it manifest to the great body of 
the early settlers that he was not only thoroughly versed in all 
the needed learning required in his position, but in addition 
to the unswerving determination that the law.should be upheld 
and enforced, created general confidence and reliance that he 
would be equal to his position in all emergencies." 

Clearly, one or the other of these statements is false. 
Clearly, Mr. Bancroft must of a necessity be well aware of the 
fact. Clearly, no true and impartial historian could have 
written both and published them to the world. Clearly, any 
one calling himself an historian, who would be guilty of doing 
so, and who occupies the position of an ''Honorary Member" 
of this Society, should, by reason of this fact alone, separate 
^nd apart from any other consideration, be dropped from its 
roll. 

It remains to be added, that since the first edition of this 
Tolume was issued, it has been surreptitiously withdrawn from 
the library of this Society and from other public libraries, and 
the new edition substituted therefor. But the crime remains 
unpunished. 

Fifth. — Because, in the second volume of his History of 
Oregon, in a foot note originally prepared and printed for that 
Tolume, at page 246, appeared the following malignant and 
cruel attack upon the name of one, whose name and memory 
any true American reveres: "Among these soldiers was U. 
S. Grant, a man of mediocre abilities and somewhat loose 
habits, subsequently elevated by accident to the head of the 
Army, and twice to the Presidency of the United States. Not 
satisfied to rest upon the world's highest honors, he turned 
and took a downward course; asked again to be President, was 
refused; begged from poor Mexico important concessions and 
was refused, and finally engaged in a business, which was 
disreputably managed and resulted in ignominious failure. 
So the end of the man was as bad as the beginning." 



19 

It was only by the earnest interceb'^ion of those who had 
become acquainted with the fact that this monstrous wrong 
was about to be perpetrated, that Mr. Bancroft was finally 
induced to have this cruel slander stricken out and a new page 
printed in its place. For this mean, cowardly and unpatriotic 
attack also, the name of Hubert Howe Bancroft deserves to be 
stricken from the roll of Honorary Membership of this Society. 
But still, in matters of this kind, the utter want of patriotism 
on the part of this "historian" would in some similar way 
find expression. And of that other great hero of the Civil 
War, " Farragut," he would have his fling, and that still 
remains on record in his works. In Volume 2 of his " Popular 
Tribunals," at page 417, occurs the following: " Farragut's 
mind seems to have undergone a change. Evidently, he bad 
made up his mind, as some years later was the case, with 
regard to fighting for or against his countrymen, that in case 
of a conflict, right or wrong, he must be found on the side of 
the strongest, which unquestionably would be that of the 
Federal authorities. " 

Sixlh. — Because, throughout this never-ending series of 
books known as "Bancroft's Histories," there runs such a 
monstrous perversion of facts, such glaring contradictions, 
such a spirit of prejudice and seemingly malignant dislikes 
and hatreds of the men of whom he has written, and such a 
willful distortion of events concerning which they claim to be 
a faithful record, that it would be a public wrong, if not a 
public crime for this Society to give countenance to them, by 
permitting further association with Mr. Bancroft in the relation 
of " Honorary Membership." In illustration and proof of this 
assertion, sweeping as it may be, instance the following 
summary : 

In his Pioneer Register and Index, Volume 4, (first edition)- 
page 730, he says of Dr. John Marsh : " He received the first 
immigration party, Bartelson's, at his rancho, and afforded 
them much assistance, though he made the new comers pay 



20 

well for liis services, and grievously oflfeaded mauj of them 
by his meanness." And again, lie says, in the same volume, 
pages 730-731 : " Dr. Marsh was a peculiar and generally dis- 
agreeable man, whose notorious parsimony kept him con- 
stantly in trouble with most that came in contact with him." 

In the second edition of the same volume, these passages 
were modified as follows, viz. : " He received the ^rst immigra- 
tion party, Bartelson's, at his rancho, and offered them much 
assistance. Dr. Marsh was a man of great intelligence, varied 
accomplishments, and of singular experience of life." 

In his " History of California," (Volume 6, pages 10 and 11, 
first edition,) he says: Dr. John Marsh, the said doctor being 
a kind of crank from Harvard College, who settled here in 
1837, in an adobe hut, and achieved distinction as a misan- 
thrope and miner, sympathetic with the spirit at whose moun- 
tain's feet (Mt. Diablo) he crouched." 

The second edition, same volume, same pages, reads as 
follows: " Dr. John Marsh, the said doctor being a graduate 
of Harvard College, who settled here in 1837, building a sub- 
stantial stone house, where he lived in the retirement he so 
loved. He was a highly individualized and intellectual man, 
whose letters to Secretary Marcy and other officials contain 
valuable information about California." 

In his California Inter Pocula, first edition, page 342, he 
says: " Augustin Haraszthy, melter and refiner of the San 
Francisco branch mint, on the 19th of September, was indicted 
by the United States grand jury upon the charge of embezzling 
gold to the amount of $151,550. He was arrested and released 
on $20,000 bail. Afterwards, he was tried and sentenced to 
six years in the State prison and to pay a fine of $2000." 

In the second edition of the same volume, appears the 
following in place of the foregoing statement. " During the 
administration of President Pierce, Augustin Haraszthy was 
appointed assayer, and later melter and refiner of the San 



21 

Francisco branch mint, resigning these positions in 1857. He 
afterwards built the metallurgical works, which have been of 
much service to the community, and are still in operation, 
receiving also patents for improved processes in the refining of 
gold." 

In his " Popular Tribunals," (first edition) Volume 2, page 
388, in treating of the stabbing of Hopkins by Judge Terry, 
during the Vigilance Committee excitement of 1856, the 
following passage occurs: "That villainous stab of the 
Supreme Court Justice struck the death-blow of his party. 
Now let Johnson proclaim until he is hoarse; let Howard rage 
until he bursts! The city in ashes, forsooth! Its gutters run- 
ning red with the blood of its citizens! Better down on your 
knees most learned and puissant assassin, and pray your God, 
if you have one, that your victim may live; for if Hopkins- 
dies, you hang!" 

In the second edition of the same volume, on the same page, 
this passage is stricken out and the following substituted in 
its place: "The open and violent collision with the Vigilant 
forces was the deathblow to the opposing party, and there is- 
no question now that, in the event of Hopkin's death, a Justice 
of the Supreme Court will be executed by the Vigilance Com- 
mittee. This presents nothing new in the popular tribunal 
principle, but if it happens it adds greatly to the cause of the 
Committee." 

Again^ on pages 420, 421 and 423, in the first issue, occur 
the following passages in regard to Terry. "A Texan border 
man with Texan border principles, he recognized fully pistol 
persuasion, bowie-knife justice and duello chivalry. He was- 
a man of remarkable ability in certain directions, with a proud, 
impetuous nature, and an indomitable will, as ready to die for 
a friend, or make others die for him, as to hunt an enemy to 
death. * * * It is a character glaring with inconsisten- 
cies and contradictions, a character which must needs gratify 



22 

all its own uujust, immoral, law-breaking propensities, but 
denies under the statute any such right to others. -5^ -J^- -^ 
His instincts seem to have been atrocious. In Texas he is 
said to have hunted the natives with remorseless cruelty, 
killing them as Nero killed flies, for the fun of it. * * * 
Blood and chivalry ! Criminality and cowardice ! How many 
attempts to kill unarmed men make a murderer? But the 
catalogue of his crimes, black enough to consign him to eternal 
infamy, is not half told. " 

In the corrected later issue, these and many other like 
denunciations of Terry are stricken out and words of pallia- 
tion and praise are substituted in their place. 

Again, at page 483 of the same volume, in the first issue, he 
said of Terry: "Though this unrighteous and blood-thirsty 
judge richly deserved hanging, it was beyond the line of duty 
and policy marked out for themselves by the committee to so 
punish him. For had they hanged all who really deserved it, 
their hands would indeed have been full. " 

In the corrected later issue, the following passage took the 
place of the foregoing : "If ihe tribunal erred it was always 
on the side of leniency, in this matter following the example 
and the law, as may well be imagined, with a thousand un- 
punished murderers in the country. Had they hanged all who 
really deserved it, their hands Avould indeed have been full." 

Again, at page 437 of the same volume, he says, in the first 
issue of that volume, in alluding to Terry: " And now that 
the writer of this history has placed the great prime minister 
of disorderly law back upon his bench, there once more to 
deal fist, pistol and bowie-knife justice, as in days past, etc." 

In the new issue of the same volume, at the same page, this 
passage is modified to read as follows: "And now that the 
writer of this history has placed the great prime minister of 
disorderly law back upon his bench, there once more to deal 
high and holy justice, as in days past, etc." 



23 

But the ease with which Mr. Bancroft can shuffle out of 
responsibility, as an historian, is best illustrated in another 
passage from Vol. 2, page 368, where, in the first issue, in 
alluding to Volnej E. Howard and Terry, he said: "What 
was Howard's patriotism? Self-glorification; pompous dis- 
play; blood-and-thunder greatness. What was Terry's patri- 
otism? Partisan jealousy; malignant passion; blood-thirsty 
revenge." 

In the new issue, of the same volume, this passage was 
modified by simply substituting other names for those of 
Howard and Terry, so that it reads as follows now: " What 
was McGo wan' s patriotism? Self-glorification; pompous dis- 
play; blood-and-thunder greatness. What was Casey's patri- 
otism? Partisan jealousy; malignant passion; blood-thirsty 
revenge." 

As these changes were made during the lifetime of Terry 
and in an apparent disinclination to face the consequences of 
his first utterances, the sharp comments of a San Francisco 
journal, which recently published these extracts, would seem 
to be fully justified. It said, " Bancroft appreciates the 
difi'erence in danger of criticising the living, and defaming the 
dead . " 

Seventh. — Throughout the innumerable books known as 
"Bancroft's Histories," there were constant and sweeping 
assertions that all men who ever wrote upon California, in an 
historical and other way, who have reached conclusions that 
are contrary to those which Mr. Bancroft maintains, are 
"liars," as the briefest way of disposing of their narratives. 
And this, too, usually without the support of evidence to sus- 
tain his arrogant and ill-bred dictum, taking it for granted 
that such dictum will be held by the general public as an 
imperial edict, not to be gainsaid or disputed coming from so 
high an anthority as himself, as the historian of historians of 
the age we live in. One fact stands out with singular promi- 



24 

nence throughout these cowardly assertions, and that is, that 
every one of the men whom he thus denounces as "liars," 
have long since passed over to the great majority, and can 
make no answer to these cruel attacks upon their rnemories. 
It is the duty of the Society of California Pioneers to vindi- 
cate their names and their memories from these wanton 
slanders, in so far as it may be in their power to do so. 

Beginning with Chaplain Fletcher, who accompanied Sir 
Francis Drake on his famous voyage in 1578-79, and who 
visited California in July of the latter year, Bancroft says 
(volume 1, "History of California, " pages 85-91) : "It should 
be noted that no regular diary or log of this voyage is extant 
or is known to have been extant. Of the three narratives 
which I have cited one was perhaps written from memory by 
a companion of Drake. The others are compilations from 
notes of the chaplain, Fletcher, written under circumstances of 
which we know but little, bjj a man not noted for his veracity^ 
and from the reminiscences probably of others." Again, on 
page 91, he says: "Few have been sufficiently impressed 
with the fundamental truth that Chaplain Fletcher was a liar."" 

In view of the fact that at the present writing a memorial 
cross and monument are being erected in our own "Golden 
Gate Park, " in commemoration of the first Christian religious 
services ever held on California soil, and that such services 
were performed by this same " Chaplain Fletcher— Bancroft's 
colossal liar — there would seem to be a clear cut issue thus 
presented for a public verdict, and that is that such com- 
memorative tribute to Christian advancement of more than 
three centuries ago, and to the humble minister of God, who 
was the instrument of its performance, is either as grotesque 
homage to a man utterly unworthy of being thus immortalized, 
or Bancroft and his books are worthy only of the contempt 
of his felllow men. 

It would be more than wearisome to follow Mr. Bancroft 
in his endless denunciations of other writers upon California, 



25 

whom he stigmatizes in a similar manner when their views 
And their writings fail to be in unison with his own desires 
and purposes. Some few examples will suffice. 

L. W. Hastings, who came to California in 1843, he says, 
(See Vol. 3, page 778) " went back in '44 by sea, and across 
Mexico, to publish a worthless book called an ' Emigrant's 
Guide," and to attract settlers and prospective revolutionists." 
He was " not overburdened with conscientious scruples, but 
never getting caught in anything disreputable." 

And this of a man who was a member of the Constitu- 
tional Convention of 1849, and against whom there is noth- 
ing of public record that would in any degree justify this 
cruel innuendo. 

At page 257 of Yolume 5, of his "History of California," 
alluding to the proclamation of Commodore Stockton, issued 
on taking command in California as the successor of Com- 
modore Sloat, he says : ' ' The paper was made up of false- 
hood, of irrelevant issues, and bombastic ranting in about 
equal parts," and again, at page 258, he says: "The third 
paragraph, describing Castro's outrageous treatment of 
JFremont, is false from beginning to end." 

At page 280, of the same volume, speakiog of language attri- 
buted to Commodore Stockton in reply to an embassy, which 
had been sent to warn him against entering Los Angeles 
with his forces, " Have the bells ready to toll at eight o'clock, 
as I shall be there at that time." He says, that this and 
other preceding statements " may very safely be designated as 
falsehoods, pure and simple." In a foot note on the same 
page, alluding to the last quoted statement of Stockton, he 
says, " This last lie was taken by this writer, as it has been 
by others, from Colton's three years in California, '5Q,'' thus 
adding the name of Colton to his list of " liars." 

So in a foot note at page 316 of the same volume, he 
quotes from the account of the retreat from Santa Barbara of 
Talbot and his little command, who had been left in charge 



26 

there, as given by Captain Phelps in his narrative of events 
of that time, entitled " Fore and Aft," as follows: " Finding 
they (the Californians) would not fight, Talbot marched off' 
in a hollow square, followed by the ' cabal leros,' who reviled 
the brave squad, but dare not attack them." "All this," says 
Bancroft, " is purely imaginary." And, while he admits that 
Phelps' statement was confirmed by Talbot's men on their 
arrival at Monterey, yet he does not hesitate to pillory them 
all in his catalogue of falsifiers, by saying, that evidently 
Talbot's men " indulged in the trapper's propensity for story 
telling. " 

At page 16 of vo]ume^6, he groups as falsifiers a quartette of 
American writers — Eevere, Phelps, Tuthill and Lancey — who, 
in their historical writings have dared to denounce Castro, for 
endeavoring to drive Fremont out of the country in March, 1846, 
and sets up his own unsupported dictum to the contrary, as 
sufiicient answer to them all. 

At page 61 of Volume 6, of his "History of California," 
after giving an account of the junta held at the house of Thos. 
O. Larkin, at Monterey in March, 1846, as related by General 
M. G. Yallejo, in which Vallejo spoke in favor of annexation 
to the United States, according to his own written statement 
of the facts — Bancroft cooly gives him the lie in this wise: 
"No such meeting was ever held, and no such speeches were 
ever made, " and he adds, "but in thus recording a formal 
meeting, with deliberate discussions of propositions to deliver 
their country to a foreign power, I am very sure that General 
Yallejo's memory has been greatly aided by his imagination. " 

Again, at page 151 of same volume, in treating of the Ide's 
proclamation at the time of the Bear Flag episode, he says: 
" This proclamation consisted, first, of a statement of the in- 
ducements under which the revolutionists had settled in 
California — false from beginning to end; second, charges of 
deception and oppression by the authorities— equally false," 
etc. * * -^ "As a whole, in truthfulness and consistency. 



27 

as in orthography and literary merit, it was below the plane of 
Castro's and Pico's proclamations." 

Lancey, author of a manuscript record preserved, as Ban- 
croft says in his library, entitled " Lancey 's cruise of the 
Dale, " is let down without being stigmatized as a falsifier, but 
still, according to Mr. Bancroft, (see page 704, Vol. 4, of his 
"History of California,") "in my opinion, excessively Ameri- 
can in his views, " the same idea being prevalent throughout 
Mr. Bancroft's works, that to write from an American stand- 
point is an unpardonable offence. 

Even the name of Thomas O. Larkin — from whose documents, 
obtained from his family and now in Mr. Bancroft's library, he 
has drawn so largely for material for his historical writing — 
does not escape from being written down as a falsifier, by 
innuendo sufficiently direct to lead to no other conclusion on 
the part of any intelligent reader. 

Alluding to a letter from Mr. Buchanan, then Secretary of 
State, to Mr. Larkin, at page 597 of Volume 4, of his " History 
of California," and quoting from such letter as follows: 
" Whilst I repeat that this government does not, under exist- 
ing circumstances, intend to interfere between Mexico and 
Calif oraia," Bancroft says, "there was, as my reader knows no 
present controversy between the two, though it had suited 
Larklris purposes to represent the contrary. " 

At page 706, of the same volume, he has another fling at 
this well remembered and much respected decreased member 
of this Society, where he says he had " the proverbial Yankee 
shrewdness in trade, with no inconvenient veneration for the 
revenue laws." 

These are but a few of the examples of reckless, random 
writing, which characterize the remarkable works knoAvn as 
* ■ Bancroft's Histories. " 

They need not be referred to in extenso — further, as they are 
sufficient testimony in themselves to convince every intelligent 
and fair-minded man, that he who can thus wantonly reflect 



28 

upon the names and memories of the dead, against whom no 
word of detraction has ever before been uttered, convicts him- 
self as a falsifier, and is therefore unworthy of belief as an 
historical writer, and, among California Pioneers, is unworthy 
of association in thequality of an "Honorary Membership." 

(Signed) W. B. FARWELK 

(For the Society of California Pioneers.) 



Your Committee caused a copy of these charges to be pre- 
pared for service upon Mr. Bancroft, together with a written 
notification from them, of which the following is a copy, viz. : 

Hall of the Society of Califoenia Pioneers, 
San Francisco, December 5, 1893. 

Hubert H. Bancroft, Esq., 

Dear Sir: The undersigned, a committee of the Society of 
California Pioneers, appointed to investigate and report upon 
certain charges of misconduct against you as an Honorary 
Member of this Society, hereby notify you that Tuesday 
evening, December 12, 1893, at 7:30 p. m., at the Committee 
room of Pioneer Hall, has been fixed as the time and place 
for the hearing of said charges; and that the type-written 
document of pages one to twenty-four, both inclusive of this 
date, signed by Willard B. Farwell, Esq., as the prosecutor on 
behalf of the Society, is a true copy of the charges against you 
for investigation; and that you are respectfully invited to 
attend at said time and place (with counsel if you please) for 
the purpose of said investigation. 

(Signed) Wm. Simpson, 

E. Thompson, 
A. S. Halt,, 
S. W. Holladay. 

This notification, together with a copy of the charges, was, 
at the request of the Committee, placed in the hands of the 



29 

Marshal of the Society, by the Secretary, for service upon Mr. 
Bancroft, who made the following return upon the same. 

San Feancisco, December 6th, 1893. 
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of a paper which 
was enclosed in a sealed envelope, directed to Mr. Hubert H. 
Bancioft. 

John F. Pinkham, 
Marshal Society of California Pioneers. 

In accordance with this notification, your Committee met on 
the 12th day of December, 1893, for the purpose therein stated. 
Mr. Bancroft not appearing before them, either in person or 
by representative, your committee requested Mr. Holladay to 
ascertain Bancroft's post office address and to forward to him 
by registered letter another copy of the charges, together with 
a further notification, fixing the 26th day of December upon 
which the Committee would again meet, and give him another 
opportunity to be heard, if he desired to do so. Your Com- 
mittee met again, on the date and at the hour mentioned in 
said last named notification, but Mr. Bancroft not appearing, 
and no response having been received from him, adjourned 
until the 9th day of January, 1894. Mr. Bancroft not then 
appearing and no response having been received from him, 
your Committee adjourned until the 16th of January, 1894, at 
which time Mr. Bancroft still having failed to appear, and 
making no response, your Committee deemed it unnecessary 
to delay the investigation further and, therefore, proceeded to 
hear and consider the charges, which had been formulated by 
Mr. Farwell and so served upon Mr. Bancroft. 

This indictment — if we may so term it — is divided into seven 
■counts, each one of which is made up of a group of specific 
charges, each of which charges your Committee proceeded to 
carefully and patiently investigate by reference to, and com- 
parison with, the several volumes of "Bancroft's Histories," 
at the several pages therein specifically referred to. As the 



30 



result of stich investigation and comparison, your Committee 
£nd as follows: 

First— The charges, set forth in the first count of said 
*' indictment," touching Mr. Bancroft's treatment of the names 
of Fremont, Stockton, Sutter and the men of the "Bear Flag 
Party," and which are covered by the preamble and resolutions 
introduced by Mr. Farwell and adopted by the Society, as 
hereinbefore set forth, your Committee find, are fully sustained. 

Second— The charges, grouped in the seco7id count of the 
indictment, and which consist of instances of unjust and cruel 
attacks upon the names and memories of early Pioneers, who 
were among the originators and early members of this Society, 
and none of whom are now living, your Committee also find, 
fully sustained. 

y/^iV(^_The charges, of misrepresentation of the facts of 
history and of maligning the memories of those Americans and 
others who were unjustly arrested and expatriated to Mexico 
in 1840, under circumstances of extreme cruelty and injustice, 
and of abuse and vilification of T. J. Farnham who was an eye 
witness of the affair, and who wrote an account of the same in 
his book, (published in 1852) entitled "Life, Adventures and 
Travels in California, "your Committee find are fully sustained, 
and comprise in themselves an act unworthy of any fair-minded 
historian, and abhorrent to every unprejudiced and patriotic 
American citizen. 

Fourth— The extraordinary charge, of having in his first 
edition of Volume 2, of the " History of Oregon," published 
an account of a trial of certain Cayuse Indian murderers, held 
■many years ago before a judge who was then, and up to the 
time of his death remained a member in good standing of this 
Society, in which the said judge was made the subject of 
attack in terms, which, if they had been true, would have con- 
signed his name and memory to lasting infamy; and of striking 
all this out and publishing in the second edition of the same 



31 

volume, au exactly opposite statement of eulogy and praise, as 
shown in the fourth count of said indictment, your Committee 
not only find fully sustained, but regard it as a shameful act, 
sufficient in itself to render the works of any so-called "histo- 
rian " unworthy of credence. 

Fifth— The apparently malignant, and certainly cruel and 
unjust, attack upon the name and memory of General Grant, 
who, while living, was an honored, as well as an "Honorary- 
Member " of this Society, as set forth in the ffth count of this 
indictment, your Committee find fully sustained, and cannot 
refrain from expressing the opinion, that to retain the name of 
General Grant in its list of "Honorary Members, " together 
with that of his maligner, Hubert Howe Bancroft, would be 
an act of inconsistency unworthy of the name and fame of the 
" Society of California Pioneers." 

Sixth—The group of charges comprised in the sixth count of 
this indictment, wherein contradictory statements, in regard 
to early Pioneers, appear in the different editions of the same 
volumes, and the pusillanimous treatment of the late Judge 
Terry's conflict with the "Vigilance Committee " of 1856, as 
related and exposed, we find fully sustained. 

Seventh— The closing, or seventh count of this already more 
than severe indictment, wherein it is shown that Mr. Bancroft's 
methods of writing history are, to assert certain conclusions of 
his own, in regard to the men and events of the period of 
which he has written and to denounce all who differ with him 
as "liars," no matter what part they may have played in these 
events, how much better may have been their opportunities of 
knowing the true facts of history, how upright may ha^^e been 
theirlives, or how unsullied their reputations while living, we 
find fully sustained. 

Finally, the case, as presented against Mr. Bancroft, as a 
whole, constitutes, in the opinion of your Special Committee, 
valid reasons why the name of Hubert Howe Bancroft should 



32 

no longer be permitted to remain upon the roll of this Society 
AS an "Honorary Member." The indifference., not to say the 
contempt, with which he has treated the Society, in not 
appearing before your Committee or making any reply to its 
communications, renders it unnecessary for us to give the 
matter any further consideration, than to report back the reso- 
lution and recommend its adoption. 

We may be permitted to add, that, in vindication of the 
truth of early California history, and of the real facts relating 
to the conquest and acquisition of the country by the United 
States, as well as in vindication of the memories of the many 
early Pioneers who have been maligned and misrepresented in 
these so-called " Bancroft's Histories," your Committee recoiii- 
mend that the " Board of Directors" be requested to have all 
the proceedings heretofore had, as well as those which may be 
had, upon the subject matter here under consideration, com- 
piled and printed in proper form for general distribution 
among the Public Libraries of the United States and elsewhere, 
as may be deemed desirable and proper. 

(Signed) William Simpson, 

R. Thompson, [^ Committee. 

S. W. HOLL-\DAY, 

A. S. Hall. 



The following resolution was offered by Dr. Wm. Simpson in 
regard to the Bear Flag Revolt : 

Resolved, That since Bancroft in his " History of California," 
while dealing with the Bear Flag Eevolt, has misrepresented 
the purposes and aims of that uprising, mistaken the condi- 
tions which brought it about, and has made it the opportunity 
of many severe attacks upon pioneer characters, we therefore 
offer the following brief review of that episode, in the interest 
of truth, and in justice to the memories of the men engaged 
in it. 



33 

It will be found that at the time of this event, there were 
about 1000 Americans (in a population, including Indians*, of 
16,000) residing in California, every one of whom had enjoyed 
the blessings and advantages of our system of government, 
and who hoped and expected at some future time to see our 
flag waving over the territory upon which their new homes 
were built. This wish was intensified by the unhappy condi- 
tion of things surrroiinding them, and which were gradually 
growing worse, as their numbers increased, by the aroused 
jealousy and suspicion of the Mexican and California officials. 
It was not only the weakness and instability of the government 
to which they were obliged to submit, or the insecurity of 
property, and discouragements to industry wbich the Mexican 
system imposed, that caused ihe few Americans living here at 
that time to wish ardently for a change. A greater and far 
more serious interruption in the ordinary pursuits of life was- 
impending, and growing more threatening from day to day. 
Texas had recently been annexed against the remonstrance of 
Mexico. The mission of Mr. Slidel to that country had been 
without a peaceful result, and had only produced new animos- 
ity. A large American lorce had been ordered near the Mexican 
border, and by these signs, as well as others, the coming war 
was easily predicted. It required no more than ordinary 
intelligence to foresee, in the expected hostilities, the loss of 
California to Mexico, and its probable conquest by either the 
United States or England. A peaceful cession to the latter 
country had been discussed by the California authorities, and 
was growing more popular among the native Californians as 
the rumors of war increased, and as their animosities against 
the Americans became excited by the critical condition of 
their mother country. While it remains to this day a matter 
of conjecture how far England was willing to proceed in 
securing to herself this territory, its peaceful surrender to her 
by the California authorities was not likely to be refused, and 
the whole American colony was in suspense and excitement in 
dread of such an occurrence. Their fortunes were not only 



34 

dangerously involved in the outcome, but, during the period 
of expected hostilities between the United States and Mexico, 
they could easily anticipate the great danger and distress 
awaiting them. American residents within the seaports and 
vicinities were assured of protection by their country's war- 
ships, of which a number were already on the coast, bat those 
of the interior had no other treatment to expect, in the event 
of war, than the well known Mexican methods of retaliation 
and punishment, and among these one quite likely to be 
invoked, and actually attempted later on, was the setting upon 
them of the Indians, who had not yet lost their sense of 
obedience to the California officials, so lately holding them in 
authority by the influence of the Missions. The necessity of 
an organization among the Americans living in the interior 
Avas apparent, and while [considering' it an event occurred, 
which greatly aggravated the situation, and led to an imme- 
diate coming together of a number of settlers, not for defense 
only, but with the further purpose of assisting to secure the 
territory to the United States. The event spoken of was the 
accidental arrival within the borders of California, of Fremont 
with his band of explorers. Fremont's difficulty with Castro, 
the details of which are too well known to require mention 
here, aroused that Mexican military commander to immediately 
issue proclamations of a wai'like character, and to begin the 
organization of a military force. 

There were a number of threatening rumors afloat besides, 
which, even admitting the extravagance of some of them, we 
know to have been generally believed. Bancroft himself 
furnishes evidence of this in the publication of the testimony, 
in a foot note, of no less than seventeen persons living at the 
time. These Avitnesses, among whom are a committee of citi- 
zens, in a report published in 1847 — W. B. Ide, H. L. Ford, 
Wm. Hargrave, Benj. DoweJl, Marshal, Semple, Heusley, 
Owens, Loker, Sutter and Fremont — all of whom agreed and 
believed th^t the Mexican government had determined upon 



35 

the expulsion of the Americans from the country, and that 
Castro was inciting the Indians against them, and threatening 
to burn their crops, and that they would have to leave the 
country or fight for their homes. Although this strong array 
of evidence was set forth by Bancroft for the purpose of dis- 
proval, and, as we believe, to lay the foundation of a bitter 
attack upon a famous Pioneer, its impeachment, under his 
examination, can have no effect whatever to impugn the 
motives of the settlers in organizing the " Bear Flag Revolt," 
since it cannot be denied they believed the rumors and were 
sincerely acting under the impressions they created. 

The Bear insurrection was essentially a movement of defense, 
The grand possibilities of the country under a better adminis- 
tration, which time has so fully verified, were apparent to its 
movers, and furnished an additional motive to assist, either by 
direct or remote methods, to bring the territory under the 
dominion of the United States. The threatened misfortune of 
being placed under English, instead of Americen rule, had its 
effect also to promote and excuse that severity and promptness 
of action, so necessary to success in such an undertaking. 

In the condemnation of the "Bear Flag Eevolt, " Bancroft 
lays great stress on what he terms its embarassment to a peace- 
ful conquest of the country. Some later events ought to have 
proved to his mind that a ready submission, by the mere 
raising of American flags in the seaports, was not likely to 
have taken place. Whoever has reckoned on such a result, 
has made too low an estimate of the patriotism and bravery of 
the people with whom we had to deal. It is reasonable to 
conclude that their early submission was as much due to 
Fremont's ever-ready opposing force at hand, inten-upting the 
progress of their concentration and unity of action, as it was 
to any measured hopelessness of their situation. We have a 
taste of what may have occurred, in the bloody engagements 
of San Pasquale, Natividad and elsewhere. An invitation of 
departure to the Americans must have come in due«time under 



3G 

the usages of war, and by an eavlj successful skirmish or two, 
unopposed by a thoroughly organized American force, arousing 
thus the hopes of the natives, and stimulating their patriotism 
to the bitter extremity perhaps of enlisting the Indians in 
their behalf; the comparatively small amount of bloodshed, of 
which Bancroft makes such virtuous complaint, would have 
been but as a drop in the bucket compared with that likely to 
have been spilt. 

The intermediary stage of independence proposed by the 
"Bear Revolt " was a forced extremity, owing to the position, 
and suggested by the then recent example of Texas. At the 
time of its organization, there was no way at hand to place it 
under the authority of the United States, and no military offi- 
cer within a thousand miles to muster it into service. Its 
proclamation of independence cuts but a small figure in its 
history, because of the willing abandonment of its flag, and 
the substitution of the " Stars and Stripes " within less than 
a month of its independent organization. Its ready mergence 
into the California Battalion, under the flag of the United 
States, and the heartfelt and genuine enthusiasm expressed by 
its members on the raising of the American flags at San 
Francisco, Monterey, Los Angeles and elsewhere, leaves no 
doubt of their loyalty and patriotism. Their individual 
careers, down to the present time, exhibit more than an 
average of usefulness and prominence in society. 

We are therefore of the opinion that Bancroft has neither 
fairly nor truthfully set forth the motives and character of the 
" Bear Flag Revolt," in his " History of California," and his 
allusion to it as the " criminal outbreak of vagabond settlers " 
is flagrantly and maliciously untrue. 

(Signed) William Simpson. 



37 

Pioneer Hall, San Francisco. 
At the regular moathly meeting of the members of "The 
Society of California Pioneers," held at Pioneer Hall on 
Monday, February 5th, 1894, — there being eighty members 
present per register — the Special Committee appointed to 
investigate the charges made by Dr. Washington Ayer against 
Hubert Howe Bancroft, submitted their final report, which 
was read by the Secretary; and also the resolution ofi'ered by 
Dr. Wm. Simpson, in relation to the " Bear Flag Party." 

The following action was then taken by the Society: 

Dr. Wm. Simpson moved the adoption of the report of the 
Committee. On being duly seconded the question was called, 
and on being put to a vote the Chair declared it carried 
imanlmously, and the report of the Committee adopted. 

W. B. Farwell moved that the resolution offered by Dr. 
Washington Ayer, proposing that the name of Hubert Howe 
Bancroft be stricken from the roll of Honorary Membership in 
this Society, be formally adopted. On being duly seconded, 
the question was called, and on being put to a vote the Chair 
declared it carried unanimously, and that Hubert Howe Ban- 
croft was no longer an Honorary Member of this ' ' The 
Society of California Pioneers.' ' 

Dr. Wm. Simpson, after the reading of his resolution, in 
relation to the "Bear Flag Party," moved its adoption. On 
being duly seconded thfe Chair declared it carried unanimously. 

(Signed) C. V. S, Gibbs, 

President. 

[seal.] John I. Spear, 

Secretary. 




.*,'' 



